Citation network
Watt Vs. Alaska
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 21, 1981
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 259 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Watt v. AlaskaSearch
-
U.S. 259 (1981) Watt v. AlaskaSearch
-
Secretary of the Interior issued oil and gas leases for the Kenai Moose Range, beginning in the mid-1950's. See Udall v. TallmanSearch
-
by implication the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 without a clear showing that this was the intent of Congress. SeeMorton v. MancariSearch
-
s holding because it gave effect to each statute. 612 F.2d at 1214-1215. We granted certiorari. Sub nom. Andrus v. AlaskaSearch
-
Blue Chip Stamps v. ManorSearch
-
U.S. Page 451 U. S. 266 723, 421 U. S. 756 (1975) (POWELL, J., concurring). See Rubin v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
But ascertainment of the meaning apparent on the face of a single statute need not end the inquiry. Train v. ColoradoSearch
-
United States v. AmericanSearch
-
Boston Sand Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
that Congress did not intend words of common meaning to have their literal effect. E.g., Church of the Holy Trinity v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 417 U. S. 549 , quoting Posadas v. NationalSearch
-
United States v. BordenSearch
-
Co., 308 U. S. 188 , 308 U. S. 198 (1939), quoting Red Rock v. HenrySearch
-
Haggar Co. v. HelveringSearch
-
Third, our opinion in Udall v. TallmanSearch
-
formula. The Department's contemporaneous Page 451 U. S. 273 construction carries persuasive weight. Udall v. TallmanSearch
-
construction is particularly appropriate in these cases, because the Department first proposed the amendment. See SEC v. SloanSearch
-
being in conflict with its initial position, is entitled to considerably less deference. See General Electric Co. v. GilbertSearch
-
to repeal this provision by implication, Morton v. MancariSearch
-
Together with No. 79-1904, Kenai Peninsula Borough v. AlaskaSearch
-
See Udall v. TallmanSearch
-
Wallis v. PanSearch
-
Cabell v. MarkhamSearch
-
The silence of Congress may provide a treacherous guide to its intent. Scripps-Howard Radio, Inc. v. FCCSearch
-
frequently, such criticism takes the form of a dissent from the denial of certiorari. See, e.g., Brown Transport Corp. v. AtconSearch
-
Although I consider the practice of dissenting from denials of certiorari counterproductive, see Singleton v. CommissionerSearch
-
Brown v. AllenSearch
-
Reiter v. SonotoneSearch
-
meaningless by a new enactment, it would have expressly indicated its intent to repeal or amend. Thus, in Morton v. MancariSearch
-
Fussell v. GreggSearch
-
amendment, nor was it a last-minute addition from the floor. See United States v. BatchelderSearch
-
Ullman v. UnitedSearch
-
See Harrison v. PPGSearch
-
Albernaz v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 450 U. S. 333 , 450 U. S. 342 (quoting United States Railroad Retirement Board v. FritzSearch
-
Sedgwick, supra, at 104. See District of Columbia v. HuttonSearch
-
Radzanower v. ToucheSearch
-
an apparent limitation on an important and pervasive statute, such as the Sherman Act. See, e.g., United States v. BordenSearch
-
meaning of statutory language would lead to an absurd or futile result, see, e.g., Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-EnamelSearch
-
or to an unreasonable result at variance with the policy of the legislation as a whole. See, e.g., United States v. AmericanSearch
-
Trucking Assns., Inc., 310 U. S. 534 . See also Shapiro v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial